[nltk_data] Downloading package stopwords to /root/nltk_data...
[nltk_data]   Unzipping corpora/stopwords.zip.

Rewards Analytics and Distribution Dashboard for Quantification Review¶

This document processes the outputs of the praise reward system and performs an analysis of the resulting token reward distribution.

Out[6]:

Distribution report for round-44

  • This period covers praise given between 2024-07-01 and 2024-07-31.
  • We allocated a total of 14384.0 TEC tokens for rewards.
  • Duplicate praise received a weighting of 0.1 the value of the original praise.
  • We assigned 3 quantifiers per praise instance.
  • Praise receiver names were not hidden behind pseudonyms during quantification

Praise Data Visualization¶

Rating distribution¶

Since praise gets valued on a scale, we can take a look at how often each value of the scale gets assigned by quantifiers. Note: This metric disregards scores of praise marked as a duplicate, since the score of the original is already being taken into account.

Top 10 highest rated contributions¶

The ten highest rated contributions for this round were the following:

Out[9]:
Avg. score To Reason
114.333333333333 moenick for all the work he has done so far on preparing the stellar integration specficiation and getting it ready for development. It looks to be a complex integration and he has worked tirelessly on planning and research to get it to this point
107.333333333333 whyldwanderer#0 for being a superhero and providing humanitarian aid to children evacuated from Gaza. You are doing an incredible job at the right moment, helping innocent children who don't deserve these difficult times. God bless you. ❤️🤞
97.6666666666667 snakey_jakey. for his efforts and patience in answering my questions about Giveth's projected revenue, upcoming grants and partnerships. I think he had to go through his list somewhere, or double check messages over different places.. so thank you so much for providing me valuable info! This is helpful in our budgeting and forecasting 🙏🏽
97.6666666666667 snakey_jakey. for giving me great, detailed, supportive & constructive feedback for my buddy review. I can tell you all put a lot of love and thought into your responses and I hope I can do you proud by integrating your words & being better 🫡
96.0 carlos096 for delivering QF integration of new model, customer support document for frquent issues and guiding the QF squad to deliver on several important fixes to support upcoming QF rounds. Additionally, he has been actively fixing performance and CI CD issues due to broken test cases.👏👏👏
96.0 oyealmond#0 for doing SUCH a great job at prepping the Giveth Comms stuff before her vacation, she took a whole week off and nothing missed a beat, INCREDIBLE!!!
89.0 cherrywiner for agreeing to take on the rewards assistant role, meeting with me at a very late hour for her and getting the scoop on how praise works, including quantification, creating rounds and wrangling quantifiers to carry out their responsiblities
89.0 whyldwanderer#0 for working all day and well into the night reviewing applications for the giv-arb round, you are a HERO! for real!! all those project owners are so lucky to have you in their corner, and we are too
84.6666666666667 Youssef.js for all the work on the GIV arbitrage bot, you've really been pushing to get it done, even if it might be a bit new!
84.6666666666667 bmeriem to responding to my crazy man requests on fixing the staging deployment and getting the categories working again. They managed to look and find a fix while I was on a demo call with the Endaoment team and let me successfully complete the feature demo of the Endaoment integration

Praise Reward Distribution¶

We can now take a look at the distribution of the received praise rewards. You can toggle the inclusion of the different sources by clicking on the legend.

Praise Giving Distribution¶

We can also take a look at the amount of praise different users gave.

Praise Flows¶

Now for something more fun: let's surface the top "praise flows" from the data. Thanks to @inventandchill for this awesome visualization! On one side we have the top 15 praise givers separately, on the other the top 25 receivers. The people outside the selection get aggregated into the "REST FROM" and "REST TO" categories.

Out[13]:

Quantifier Data¶

Now let's take a closer look at the quantification process and the quantifiers:

Praise Outliers¶

To aid the revision process, we highlight disagreements between quantifiers.

Outliers sort by spreads¶

This graphic visualizes controversial praise ratings by sorting them by the "spread" between the highest and lowest received score.

Please keep in mind that this is a visual aid. If there are several praise instances with similar spread and quant score, all but one end up "hidden" on the chart. For an exhaustive list, take a look at the exported file "praise_outliers.csv" .

Praise score by quantifier -- outliers among the quantifiers?¶

Let's see how different quantifiers behaved by showing the range of praise scores they gave.

To interpret the box plot:

  • Bottom horizontal line of box plot is minimum value

  • First horizontal line of rectangle shape of box plot is First quartile or 25%

  • Second horizontal line of rectangle shape of box plot is Second quartile or 50% or median.

  • Third horizontal line of rectangle shape of box plot is third quartile or 75%

  • Top horizontal line of rectangle shape of box plot is maximum value.

Score displacement: tendency to under/over-scoring?¶

Scoring correlation: how similiar am I scoring with others?¶

Agreement on duplication¶

Out[22]:

Among 279 praises, 18 (6.45%) do not agree on duplication

Praise instances with disagreements in duplication are collected in 'results/duplication_examination.csv'. To compare, look at the last 4 columns: 'DUPLICATE MSG 1/2/3' and 'ORIGINAL MSG'.

Agreement on dismissal¶

Out[25]:

Among 279 praises, 4 (1.43%) do not agree on dismissal

Praise instances with disagreements in dismissal are collected in'results/dismissal_disaggreed.csv'. You can further look into who dismissed and who did not.